From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.2 required=3.0 tests=DKIM_SIGNED,DKIM_VALID, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI,SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS, URIBL_BLOCKED,USER_AGENT_SANE_1 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68E6BC43331 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from kanga.kvack.org (kanga.kvack.org [205.233.56.17]) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2E937206BB for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:45:39 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.i=@cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com header.b="ub/z2usV" DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.3.2 mail.kernel.org 2E937206BB Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=fail (p=none dis=none) header.from=cmpxchg.org Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) id 9CA4A6B000E; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:38 -0500 (EST) Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 40) id 97B506B026A; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:38 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: int-list-linux-mm@kvack.org Received: by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix, from userid 63042) id 86A836B026D; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:38 -0500 (EST) X-Delivered-To: linux-mm@kvack.org Received: from forelay.hostedemail.com (smtprelay0055.hostedemail.com [216.40.44.55]) by kanga.kvack.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70DEA6B000E for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:38 -0500 (EST) Received: from smtpin04.hostedemail.com (10.5.19.251.rfc1918.com [10.5.19.251]) by forelay01.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 39F4F180AD81F for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:45:38 +0000 (UTC) X-FDA: 76148352756.04.bun54_6b167b1248634 X-HE-Tag: bun54_6b167b1248634 X-Filterd-Recvd-Size: 6627 Received: from mail-qv1-f66.google.com (mail-qv1-f66.google.com [209.85.219.66]) by imf48.hostedemail.com (Postfix) with ESMTP for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 17:45:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-qv1-f66.google.com with SMTP id f12so6737218qvu.3 for ; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 09:45:35 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=cmpxchg-org.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SKH1z3odsh0dOqBa6+gRpBBgGUSs+RoaA3vn9y35Y60=; b=ub/z2usVbtFPjwv5NwXjzZOGEt0DMd+Iqld9+xj+Yl6kgLI5sbPVNMFYOb8FphZv/b BOH6/CImQShh5zf1106fe38oXqHRiOImx+m4x4mvAz4Qiv++Jict33McH/GHVy/Em7Cm rxBENqSGDHcpOZgHBAKZTNDa9Kp7QPzrahLz2q2Siu7mCw4UbnAsPy6VJYwsQ8hizkIz X2XmaOmYD5vh7g0N+ByQiR749Kio6CNFkkJXHceQLzfJNGFB3s3HYpC0QUXfvxl/yL// kFFf8yaTa6YP9NebtFV7KnpIECtsJ3ZV+J0KSn7s/bPmFMlcMf3Zi99mkvW7tnZv2/Th NXWQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references :mime-version:content-disposition:in-reply-to:user-agent; bh=SKH1z3odsh0dOqBa6+gRpBBgGUSs+RoaA3vn9y35Y60=; b=Y25hV+tolaXja7J6MKllGy7p8d1yf5xV4PjU8Oj8MU9dBz1PugaFLfV/zqCOFOuCCS DprjzhM+uRbhXysSAL7+lGzvlPhmPDfaO+bC7KJd1g2D3U6ZOmS6gUUKns7kypcf1Zh/ iZMk9wlNKsgXAH7UOFdxaNn7XcWSVytmkjYDlmVAoAoZaxHvF4N2E52un/sk4DxxCQkD d7bHU9iy7I+iBe5C/haazLOZtm+lWNfnM8l/Ngyt31G0ZJVjzDqI9CqpH+ft+y2/leNY IbPwXKu4vk6AwpS2GpPtdTdVmlasouswu1iprKUcxa1icsMQ5FjRPThiDEFvOA/02dai Y8VA== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAXH6lMzOJ8KxZMsYU4TECzNu7APlAXwIZ0E/qRrvTVS5x34dwyD 0ilszvz9cKgmytVvUT0q+k8Ajg== X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqx1IVJr4fbG3VE4xzwfF+4/eGG9CfF0SUyfwLgcuYPB9sFtW/qdTwELYrUt14O8oOUOEMMvHQ== X-Received: by 2002:ad4:5441:: with SMTP id h1mr17265157qvt.120.1573580734695; Tue, 12 Nov 2019 09:45:34 -0800 (PST) Received: from localhost ([2620:10d:c091:500::aa8c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id z5sm10649218qtm.9.2019.11.12.09.45.33 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Tue, 12 Nov 2019 09:45:33 -0800 (PST) Date: Tue, 12 Nov 2019 12:45:33 -0500 From: Johannes Weiner To: Suren Baghdasaryan Cc: Andrew Morton , Andrey Ryabinin , Shakeel Butt , Rik van Riel , Michal Hocko , linux-mm , cgroups mailinglist , LKML , kernel-team@fb.com Subject: Re: [PATCH 2/3] mm: vmscan: detect file thrashing at the reclaim root Message-ID: <20191112174533.GA178331@cmpxchg.org> References: <20191107205334.158354-1-hannes@cmpxchg.org> <20191107205334.158354-3-hannes@cmpxchg.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.12.2 (2019-09-21) X-Bogosity: Ham, tests=bogofilter, spamicity=0.000000, version=1.2.4 Sender: owner-linux-mm@kvack.org Precedence: bulk X-Loop: owner-majordomo@kvack.org List-ID: On Sun, Nov 10, 2019 at 06:01:18PM -0800, Suren Baghdasaryan wrote: > On Thu, Nov 7, 2019 at 12:53 PM Johannes Weiner wrote: > > > > We use refault information to determine whether the cache workingset > > is stable or transitioning, and dynamically adjust the inactive:active > > file LRU ratio so as to maximize protection from one-off cache during > > stable periods, and minimize IO during transitions. > > > > With cgroups and their nested LRU lists, we currently don't do this > > correctly. While recursive cgroup reclaim establishes a relative LRU > > order among the pages of all involved cgroups, refaults only affect > > the local LRU order in the cgroup in which they are occuring. As a > > result, cache transitions can take longer in a cgrouped system as the > > active pages of sibling cgroups aren't challenged when they should be. > > > > [ Right now, this is somewhat theoretical, because the siblings, under > > continued regular reclaim pressure, should eventually run out of > > inactive pages - and since inactive:active *size* balancing is also > > done on a cgroup-local level, we will challenge the active pages > > eventually in most cases. But the next patch will move that relative > > size enforcement to the reclaim root as well, and then this patch > > here will be necessary to propagate refault pressure to siblings. ] > > > > This patch moves refault detection to the root of reclaim. Instead of > > remembering the cgroup owner of an evicted page, remember the cgroup > > that caused the reclaim to happen. When refaults later occur, they'll > > correctly influence the cross-cgroup LRU order that reclaim follows. > > I spent some time thinking about the idea of calculating refault > distance using target_memcg's inactive_age and then activating > refaulted page in (possibly) another memcg and I am still having > trouble convincing myself that this should work correctly. However I > also was unable to convince myself otherwise... We use refault > distance to calculate the deficit in inactive LRU space and then > activate the refaulted page if that distance is less that > active+inactive LRU size. However making that decision based on LRU > sizes of one memcg and then activating the page in another one seems > very counterintuitive to me. Maybe that's just me though... It's not activating in a random, unrelated memcg - it's the parental relationship that makes it work. If you have a cgroup tree root | A / \ B1 B2 and reclaim is driven by a limit in A, we are reclaiming the pages in B1 and B2 as if they were on a single LRU list A (it's approximated by the round-robin reclaim and has some caveats, but that's the idea). So when a page that belongs to B2 gets evicted, it gets evicted from virtual LRU list A. When it refaults later, we make the (in)active size and distance comparisons against virtual LRU list A as well. The pages on the physical LRU list B2 are not just ordered relative to its B2 peers, they are also ordered relative to the pages in B1. And that of course is necessary if we want fair competition between them under shared reclaim pressure from A.